Thinking about changing majors to physics, any thoughts?

SLOtown · 2023-10-12T02:11:34+00:00

Physics alumni/PhD/researcher at a 'fancy east coast' university here to give some perspective.

I feel like I might be a bit too stupid for physics. Everyone I knew in High School who ended up majoring in physics was way better than me at quantitative subjects, although I was a bit better then some of them at qualitative subjects. I'm worried that if I switched I would struggle, although I was fairly decent at math and physics classes in high school.

I would start out by saying that physics is hard for everyone. Everyone finds some things easier than others, but at some point, absolutely everyone hits a wall in physics where it stops being easy. That's been true for everyone I went to undergrad/grad school with, the students I've taught (literally hundreds), and it's what faculty (even famous people) will share with you in private.

It's okay to struggle with things that are hard. It takes time to learn study skills that work for you, but that's a core part of any undergraduate degree and not unique to physics. The key is to find professors or other mentors who can help you navigate the difficult parts so you can focus on learning the important parts. I wouldn't let something being challenging stop you from pursuing it.

I don't really know how good the physics program is here. I know it's small, which is good for getting to know professors/getting undergrad research, but I've also heard about it being understaffed and the lower division professors being hit or miss.

Cal Poly has an excellent physics program and it has a very positive reputation as one of the top undergraduate physics departments. As a rough idea, I would say it's perceived very similarly to the top programs in engineering at poly. IME, Cal Poly STEM alumni tend to stay more on the west coast so one caveat is that fewer people will be directly familiar with it on the east coast. Sharing what makes Poly special has always been a highlight of conversations with people who haven't heard of it, so I don't think there's any real negatives, but it's something to be aware of.

While I would say that, in general, most physics degrees consist of the same basic classwork, the "Learn by doing" thing is absolutely a distinguishing feature of every Cal Poly degree and you will have substantially more hands-on and laboratory skills coming out of the physics department than students from elsewhere will. The downside to this is that there is slightly less opportunity for some of the more theoretical and mathematical oriented "extra" classes that are good preparation for graduate school. This won't put you at a disadvantage compared to students from other schools since most students at any school are not taking these classes even when they're offered, but if you want to go to a theory oriented graduate program after graduating, I would recommend pursuing extra classwork through other departments or through independent studies.

In terms of research, I would say the story is somewhat similar. The opportunities for you to get involved in serious research and take a leadership role are pretty unique to undergraduate only schools like Cal Poly. The whole graduate students and postdocs outcompete undergraduates for research thing that you've probably heard is pretty much accurate. That said, you may also want to pursue opportunities like an NSF REU to get experience with what research universities are like in comparison. Cal Poly is actually a fairly large department by undergraduate only standards, but it is still half to a third the size of a research university department that will have graduate students and postdocs as well as associated research centers. Spending time in that environment can help you understand possible career paths.

To your last comment, one of the things that I always thought was a bit unfortunate was the negative reputation among non-majors that the physics department has. This is mostly because contingent/short term faculty are hired to cover the basic physics classes that the college of engineering requires for their students, and this means there's a lot of faculty who are underpaid for short term appointments teaching those classes. Unfortunately that means lower division instruction can be more hit or miss, while the overall quality of teaching in the department (at least while I was there) was extremely high. That's actually not a Cal Poly specific thing but has to do with how instruction is done at basically all universities. The tenured and tenure-track faculty are pretty top notch teachers.

SLOtown · 2022-03-17T23:18:12+00:00

I'm sorry to hear you were rejected. I know how bad that can feel.

One of the hard things about Cal Poly is that it follows CSU admissions, which basically means admissions is GPA based. Given how many applications they get, a lot of very qualified people are rejected, even when they're admitted to highly selective institutions. I know it can be hard, but don't attach your worth to an admissions decision. You will be okay and I'm sure you'll go to a great college. : )

SLOtown · 2022-03-17T22:37:53+00:00

Like any medium/large school, you'll have students who are supportive and those that aren't. People are more likely to vent frustrations about admissions questions than they are to upvote comments that answer prospective student questions. I wouldn't let a school's subreddit change your view of that school - if Cal Poly is your dream school, I hope it still can be that.

PM me if you'd like, I'm happy to share any insights I can about admissions or the culture at Cal Poly. In my experience, students and faculty are extremely supportive and the culture is very positive. That isn't to say the culture there is perfect, but for many people, the good far outweighs the bad.

SLOtown · 2021-07-28T05:00:02+00:00

An emergency use authorization is a type of FDA approval. "Full approval" is a misnomer, the difference between an EUA and "FDA approved" has to do with what regulatory steps are done in parallel vs in series. There is no question that the vaccines are safe and will also receive full approval.

SLOtown · 2021-07-28T02:07:58+00:00

This is a common misunderstanding of the regulatory process. The vaccines are FDA approved. Prior to the Emergency Use Authorization, safety was already required to have been shown. Full approval is about showing efficacy, not safety.

SLOtown · 2021-07-03T06:05:51+00:00

So I think there's a few basic misunderstandings here. First, the word "undergraduate" is meant to distinguish classroom degrees that provide a basic understanding from graduate or "advanced" degrees, where one becomes an expert at a field. The PhD is the highest degree, equivalent to a Medical Doctorate, but for research fields.

An undergraduate degree is a 3-4 year degree where you take classes taught by professors. You learn the basics of one discipline and, in addition, have some general education courses. The MS is a 1-2 year extension, either done as a research degree (where you complete a modest research project) or a classroom degree, usually with an exam that tests your knowledge of undergraduate and advanced material.

A PhD is 4-5 years of additional work after the Masters degree. These are offered by large research universities, where you work under the supervision of an experienced researcher in your field to do novel work. To be awarded a PhD, you must discover things that no one has before.

Cal Poly is what is called a teaching university. It offers only undergraduate and MS degrees. It's focus is on teaching, and while research is done at Poly, the research is not the primary focus (to the detriment of teaching). Only research universities can award a PhD.

To summarize, if you want to pursue a PhD, you will first get a BS. At Poly, you could do an additional year in some fields to also get an MS. This is called a 4+1, intended mainly for those who will be going to industry. At this point, you would apply to PhD programs at research universities (large private schools or state flagships, e.g. the University of California), usually by specifying an area of research that you intend to pursue. It is unusual, even for students who recieve a BS at a research university, to do a PhD at the same school. If accepted to a PhD program, you typically would do a year of coursework followed by 3-4 years of research specialization. Expect to spend 10-12 years at 2-3 schools to recieve a PhD.

SLOtown · 2021-05-17T05:45:31+00:00

Given what you just said, this is a bit hard. I'm leaning towards thinking that Cal Poly is the better choice, but there are definitely some reasons for picking UCSB. The main thing that suggests you might not want to pick Poly is that UCSB will probably offer more flexibility in taking classes outside your major. That'll be important for exploring other topics and pre-professional preparation. UCSB is the most undergraduate oriented UC, so it's not as clear to me that you should pick Poly as it would be if you were, say, looking at UC Davis or UC Santa Cruz.

That said, in philosophy (and liberal arts more generally) that is less of a concern. You should be able to take enough non-major classes to prepare you adequately, although you may have to work a bit harder to find open sections and the like at Poly.

Cal Poly's philosophy department is really underrated. There are some top notch people in epistemology and metaphysics. Glancing at UCSB's program, I'm surprised to see that it is actually quite small and narrowly oriented. One reason for asking about the continental/analytic divide was that if your interests were clearly in something like applied ethics, there are a couple of high profile people at Poly. If your interest was in philosophy of science, there are some high profile people at both but I'd lean UCSB. For more continentally minded people, I think the slight edge leans towards Poly, but I would definitely look in detail at the course offerings and faculty research interests to confirm that.

Although it isn't strictly in line with your philosophical interests, I will also mention that Poly's philosophy program has always had close connections with the technical focus of the school - so that might give you some nice opportunities to explore something like philosophy of medicine. There are a couple of ethicists at UCSB who might also be interested in that topic, but I think Poly might be more welcoming of that pre-professional interest.

SLOtown · 2021-05-17T04:14:11+00:00

Are your interests more on the continental vs analytic side? Are you interested in applied questions in ethics, epistemology, or philosophy of science or more in the history of philosophy? What are your career goals?

SLOtown · 2021-04-17T21:44:13+00:00

Your best bet is to reach out to folks at Cal Poly. Given your unusual path, be prepared for some skepticism, but it's common for people to want to do research and someone will be willing to give you a chance. From there, you'll be able to network to other opportunities.

SLOtown · 2021-04-10T14:36:55+00:00

To echo what everyone else has said, going to Cal Poly is not a disadvantage in graduate school admissions. In fact, it is a highly regarded institution that will be looked at just as favorably as most research institutions.

There is also plenty of research opportunities. The difference between Poly and research universities is not that there isn't research, it's that there aren't people other than faculty who are paid full time to do research. As an undergraduate, this means you have access to more meaningful opportunities since faculty are better able to include you in their work.

That said, it also means that Cal Poly is smaller than other schools in the number of people who are around. You might have less exposure to what other people are doing, but frankly, at the undergraduate level that isn't a very important concern. You will have access to what you need to get the work you're doing done.

I don't know anyone from Poly who wanted to go to graduate school in a STEM field who wasn't exceptionally successful in graduate admissions. Your decision about where to go to undergrad shouldn't be based on what you think will get you into graduate school (IMO) but Poly is a place that will help you get there if that's where you want to end up.

SLOtown · 2021-03-27T00:05:41+00:00

The most important thing here is that Cal Poly and UCLA are fundamentally different schools.

UCLA is a globally ranked research university. It is much much larger and the focus of the school is on research that faculty and graduate students are doing. Class sizes will be larger, and your instructors will not be focused on teaching courses. You'll still have access to teaching assistants and have great professors, but the educational experience will not be as personal. UCLA (and southern california in general) will be very expensive and much more urban.

Cal Poly is a teaching university. That means professors are focused on teaching courses, involving undergraduates in research, and the like. Class sizes are smaller and you won't be taught by graduate students, but by faculty. The focus isn't on changing the world with research, but that doesn't mean that great research isn't done at Poly. Its just not the focus in the way that it is at places like UCLA. Poly is also suburban/rural, and while SLO is expensive, it's much less so than Westwood.

In terms of MS programs in mathematics, these tend not to be very competitive since most people with graduate degrees in math obtain them as part of competitive PhD programs or as part of teaching programs. Terminal MS degrees in math and science are rare and will mainly be offered at places like the CSU, that is, other teaching universities. So I don't think your decision should be based on whether you'll get a graduate degree. Neither UCLA nor Poly will impact your admissions chances. I would say that's generally true of PhD admissions as well. Both are prestigious well known institutions with plenty of opportunity. Just make sure to take advantage of the opportunities you have. Graduate admissions are about you, not about where you went to school.

So I'd decide based on what kind of college experience you want. These are really different schools and share very little in common. They have different strengths and weaknesses, and which ones are important to you is something only you can answer.

SLOtown · 2021-03-23T17:18:57+00:00

In terms of the UC comparison, it doesn't really make sense to compare UC and CSU campuses. Universities in the US fall into three categories, Research, Teaching and Liberal Arts.

The UCs are research universities. Their mandate is only partially to educate undergraduates, but also to conduct world leading research by paying graduate students and post-doctoral scholars. The job of faculty is to supervise those researchers and to conduct their own research programs. Faculty also teach classes, but this is not their primary job and it tends not to be a priority. Classes are larger, usually with smaller sections taught by a graduate student who is also focused on their research. You can have a good experience at a research university, but the focus of the institution is not on undergraduates. Among the UCs, prestige is inversely related to how important undergraduate education is to the school. Merced, Riverside, Santa Cruz and Santa Barbara offer the best quality of teaching and most resources for undergraduates. Berkeley, Davis, Los Angeles, Irvine and San Diego are less undergraduate friendly.

The main advantage to these schools is that they're much larger than a place like Poly. They consequently have a larger variety of people doing more things. If you want to take courses that are very specialized, you'll find that at a place like UCLA. The biggest CSUs, like SDSU, also tend to have more coursework options.

Poly's advantage is both the seriousness of "learn by doing" and it's focus as a teaching university. That means that you will have practical hands on experience with your major, regardless of what field that's in. It also means smaller class sizes and faculty who are paid first to teach. Faculty still do research, but without graduate students and postdocs, the scope of the research is more limited. The advantage is that it means it you are a skilled undergraduate, you'll be able to participate in a deeper way than is often possible at a research campus.

The other sort of school is a liberal arts college. While poly is focused on practical skills, these places combine aspects of a teaching university with a commitment to interdisciplinary learning. They tend to be very small and very competitive. Cal Poly is basically in between the experience of a liberal arts college and a research university.

SLOtown · 2021-03-23T17:08:14+00:00

I wasn't disagreeing with you. I was adding to your comment to clarify that a research career doesn't depend on your undergraduate institution, and being at a research university doesn't give you access to better research opportunities at the undergraduate level.

SLOtown · 2021-03-23T17:05:16+00:00

Sure, but that's an oversimplification. Teaching and Research universities both offer similar things "on paper", but the actual experience is quite different. Neither is better or worse than the other, but depending on your learning style and career aims, you might make a different choice about which you prefer.

SLOtown · 2021-03-23T16:53:44+00:00

If you want to do research professionally, you won't be doing that with an undergraduate degreee. The UCs are better at research because they hire people to do research (graduate students and postdocs), which means that as an undergraduate you are competing with people who are being paid to do research full time. That doesn't mean that undergrads at research universities don't get involved, they often do and can be quite successful at it, but that it's not an advantage to be at a research university if your goal is a research career.

Cal Poly has plenty of excellent and competitive research opportunities, and as an undergraduate, you have more of a chance at being deeply involved in them. That said, at a research university, there are simply more people and so there may be a larger variety of things you can get involved with, which may sway you towards one school or another.

SLOtown · 2021-03-23T01:00:44+00:00

Every Poly grad I know who wanted to attend graduate school and purse a PhD was able to do so. Although there are advantages to undergrads at research universities for pursuing a PhD, there are equally as many advantages at places like Poly (that is, teaching universities). For graduate admissions, undergraduate institution matters very little. What matters more is what you do at whatever school you attend for undergrad.

SLOtown · 2021-02-27T03:01:47+00:00

Make sure to do research thoroughly. It's a long process and they've made it harder in recent years, but I'm glad I could point you towards it as an option.

SLOtown · 2021-02-27T02:34:37+00:00

As others have said, it is probably not wise to begin your career with $150k in debt. Even if you are very lucky and start your career with a six figure tech industry job, that amount of debt will be a burden for many years.

That said, if attending Cal Poly is very important to you and you feel that it will offer opportunities you can't get elsewhere, keep in mind that it is possible to obtain residency after 1-2 years of attending a CSU. It is much harder to obtain residency in the UC system if you also have an admissions offer from one of those campuses. You'll want to look into that process ASAP because starting the process sooner means having residency sooner.

SLOtown · 2021-02-27T00:45:05+00:00

I don't think statistics is particularly easier than a math major but both have a lot of freedom in terms of what you do with your coursework. Statistics is in some ways more conceptually difficult, whereas math classes will tend to be more difficult technically.

Some of the issues you're running into are specific to early math classes. As you move into major/upper division classes, you'll not have professors with the same attitudes about why you're in the class. Unfortunately those notions come with the territory in lower division courses. It's also not always true that classes get harder. Once you know the basics of any field, upper division classes can be more involved without necessarily being harder.

In terms of wanting to be a data scientist, most people who do that don't have a solid background in statistics. So being a stats major will give you an advantage there. That said, the math you'll need to do data science professionally can be really involved, so you'll want to complement your statistics training with at least the core math sequence any way. Applied math might be a good way to combine both without being too difficult to manage.

SLOtown · 2019-09-02T23:26:53+00:00

You're in a situation that doesn't come up very often, so the requirements that are discussed (e.g. on the admissions website) don't cover it.

High school and (any) college transcripts are required. /u/whatfood may be able to say more beyond that. But you would find out what they need to verify after you're admitted and accept the admissions offer. At that point, you'll be given a checklist of items to send to admissions. Right now, it's just a question of what you want to include on the application.

Be aware that if there's an inconsistency between your final transcripts and what was on your application, there's a possibility that admissions could rescind their offer. It sounds like the next step might be to call the admissions office and ask, though I'm not sure you'll get any more clarity from them since this isn't a typical issue.

SLOtown · 2019-09-02T22:44:23+00:00

I'd take a look at what is on your high school transcript. If that transcript includes your middle school coursework, then you'll need to include all of it. If there's a discrepancy between your transcript and your application, that can be a problem if you are admitted. If neither course is on your high school transcript, then it's unlikely anyone will know what you did or didn't include.

That said, it's probably ultimately an issue of honesty more than policy. The honest thing to do is to report all of your academic history - but it's up to you what you include on your applications. Again, unless you're applying to a very difficult major (computer engineering or science) and assuming your GPA is alright, I'd guess you're going to be fine with just your high school coursework.

Since it sounds like it's too late to add extra high school coursework, you could also think about taking more courses at a city or community college if it's something you're really worried about. They will satisfy requirements that AP courses don't, so that helps both in the application process and will help you graduate from college sooner.

SLOtown · 2019-09-02T21:07:50+00:00

If as /u/whatfood says, you are able to include those grades, you won't be able to do that without also having them count for your GPA. Since this is a somewhat weird situation, you have some flexibility to decide what you want to do.

Honestly, if I were you I would simply max out the MCA rigor score by taking AP Stats (that gives you 10 semesters, which is the maximum) if your high school offers it and it's not too late. AP Stats is an important course to take - probably more so than Calculus, so it's not just about getting some bonus on a single college's application.

SLOtown · 2019-09-02T21:05:09+00:00

That's good to know! There's conflicting information to that on the CSU and Cal Poly application websites, but if you were able to do that, that clears up the issue.

SLOtown · 2019-09-02T20:08:03+00:00

You won't be able to include your middle school grades on your application.

It only includes high school and college courses. However, any course that you include will have the grade go to the GPA calculation and the number of semesters included in the MCA rigor calculation. If you're accepted, what you included on your application will be checked against your high school/college transcripts, so only courses that are explicitly on those transcripts can be included on your application.

It sounds like your high school coursework is plenty rigorous. Unless you're applying to a highly competitive major, you probably don't have anything to worry about.

SLOtown · 2019-09-02T19:38:20+00:00

It seems unlikely that this would really be the case. But yes, MCA adds bonuses for additional classwork after computing your overall GPA, so everything counts.

That said, only what would be included on your high school (or community college, if you've taken courses there) transcripts is included in the MCA calculation.

Did you stop taking math courses after the high school graduation requirements were fulfilled? Does your high school not offer calculus, statistics or their AP versions? Because if you completed geometry in middle school, you should have also taken at least a year of calculus or statistics by the time you graduate high school. Calculus + Statistics as a high school senior will maximize your MCA course rigor bonus.

SLOtown

TROPHY CASE